FROM

In Defense of Animals (IDA), an international animal protection
organization, released today its list of the Ten Worst Zoos for Elephants
for 2013. This marks IDA’s ten-year anniversary of exposing the suffering
endured by elephants in zoos.

“Ten years should have been enough, but as long as zoos continue to house
elephants in substandard exhibits that sacrifice the animals’ welfare, IDA
will continue to call out the worst offenders,” said Nicole Meyer, Director
of IDA’s Elephant Protection Campaign. “It’s high time for the zoo industry
to stop paying lip service and start taking meaningful action to improve
conditions for the hundreds of elephants languishing—and dying
prematurely—in zoos across North America.”

IDA’s list illustrates how the zoo industry routinely ignores the needs
of elephants in zoos through reckless breeding; housing them in unnatural
social groupings in inadequate exhibits and cold climates; using outdated,
harmful management techniques; and relying on conservation as a
justification for keeping elephants in captivity when wild elephants are
being slaughtered to near-extinction.

The Toronto Zoo’s appearance on IDA’s 2009 list sparked a campaign that
led to the closure of that exhibit in 2013 with three elephants retired to a
sanctuary. This brings the number of zoos that have closed, or will close,
their elephant exhibits to 26. While zoos and the Association of Zoos and
Aquariums (AZA), the accrediting trade organization, are finally starting to
acknowledge what IDA has asserted for years—that elephants need space and
appropriate social groupings in order to thrive—the zoo industry continues
to drag its feet by allowing countless elephants to suffer.

1. San Antonio (San Antonio, Texas)—One (Un)Lucky Elephant

Lucky

The San Antonio Zoo grabs the top spot on IDA’s list
this year over its stubborn and selfish insistence on keeping a female Asian
elephant named Lucky in solitary confinement following Queenie’s death in
March. The AZA, which knows better, sanctioned this despicable decision by
handing the zoo a variance from industry “standards,” allowing the zoo to
keep Lucky alone, likely until she dies. In response to IDA’s appeal to
retire Lucky to a sanctuary, the zoo’s director offered this terse response:
“The San Antonio Zoo, as always, will keep Lucky’s best interests in mind.
We shall act accordingly.” Really? If the zoo truly believes that housing a
profoundly social animal in isolation in a decrepit exhibit is acting in her
best interests, then IDA has a bridge to sell them. Meanwhile, the zoo is
dumping $8 million into a centennial plaza aimed at making the place more
fun for visitors, not more bearable for the animals.
The San Antonio Zoo appears for the sixth time on IDA’s list, brought
forward this year from the Hall of Shame.

2. Edmonton Valley Zoo (Edmonton, Canada)—Can You Hear Me Now?

Lucy

What more can we say about the Edmonton Valley Zoo’s stubborn refusal to do
right by Lucy? This profoundly social female Asian elephant has lived alone
for six long years in the zoo’s tiny enclosure, locked away for much of the
year due to Alberta’s bitterly cold climate. Neither worldwide furor over
Lucy’s cruel confinement, or the sound decisions by two other Canadian zoos
to send their elephants to warmer climates, has moved zoo or Edmonton
officials to move toward meeting Lucy’s social and physical needs. Lucy
suffers from chronic arthritis and foot problems, displays abnormal
stereotypic behavior, and is managed with an outdated circus-style method
using bullhooks. Further, the zoo refuses to allow an independent
veterinarian to examine Lucy, and CAZA—the zoo’s accrediting body—won’t
stand up for her. Lucy’s only hope now hinges on whether new city
councillors show reason and compassion for her.
The Edmonton Valley Zoo appears for the fourth time on IDA’s list.

3. Little Rock Zoo (Little Rock, AR)—Where Elephants Go to Die

Zina

The Little Rock Zoo earns a top spot on IDA’s list for its role as partner
in crime in the most shameful inter-zoo transfer of 2013, for housing
elephants in a tiny, antiquated exhibit, and for using bullhooks. The zoo
euthanized an Asian elephant named Jewell in September after handlers found
her collapsed one morning. Jewell’s was the third elephant death on Little
Rock’s hands in about two years. Records obtained by IDA show that Jewell
suffered from a litany of chronic and painful health issues, including
debilitating arthritis and abscesses the size of softballs on her feet. IDA
also uncovered that Jewell had tuberculosis and that the zoo’s surviving
elephant, 53-year-old Zina, was likely exposed. Instead of doing the right
thing by retiring Zina to a sanctuary and shutting down its shoddy exhibit
for good, the zoo snuck in two more sick elephants from the Niabi Zoo. All
three deserved better than to end up here.

The Little Rock Zoo appears on IDA’s list for the second time.

4. Buttonwood Park Zoo (New Bedford, MA)—All Talk, No Action

Emily and Ruth

If the latest debacle at the Buttonwood Park Zoo doesn’t drive home the
point that elephants shouldn’t live in cold climates, nothing will. Ruth,
one of the zoo’s two aging Asian elephants, recently wandered out into a
blizzard where she stood alone for hours in frigid temperatures after
zookeepers forgot to padlock the barn when they left for the night. For
seven long years, a string of zoo directors has pondered what to do with the
elephants, recognizing that the exhibit is cramped and outdated, but all the
talk has led to no action. Emily and Ruth remain in the same miserable
conditions on just 1/3 acre, locked inside for much of the winter. Both
elephants suffer from captivity-caused problems including chronic foot
disease and arthritis, aggression, and stereotypic behavior. The current zoo
director is clinging to the idea that this small, New England-themed zoo
needs elephants, while a proposed yard expansion, for which funding may not
be possible, won’t provide any relief and still denies Emily and Ruth what
they desperately need—retirement to a sanctuary in a warmer climate.
The Buttonwood Park Zoo appears for the fourth time on IDA’s list.

5. Bronx Zoo (Bronx, NY)—Conservation Abroad but Cruelty at Home

Happy

The Bronx Zoo’s governing body talks about helping wild elephants, but no
one seems to notice the three elephants who languish at this zoo. Happy—the
elephant whose mirror self-awareness proved that elephants are in the
highest echelon of animal intelligence—has endured a solitary existence
since 2006. Patty and Maxine, who don’t get along with Happy, have only each
other. When Happy’s companion died eight years ago, the zoo announced plans
to phase out its elephant exhibit, acknowledging the elephants’ need for
space and companionship, but left the elephants in limbo. All three
elephants continue to endure the zoo’s cramped space in a cold climate,
where they are on exhibit for just six months of the year, visible only from
a tram that offers tourists a quick glimpse. Conservation work is
commendable, but turning a blind eye to the suffering of three captive
elephants is despicable.

The Bronx Zoo appears for the third time on IDA’s list.

6. Saint Louis Zoo (St. Louis, MO)—Nothing to Look Forward to

The Saint Louis Zoo first landed on IDA’s list for its inadequate, tiny
exhibit that causes elephants to suffer from chronic health problems, such
as foot disease and arthritis. With yet another baby born in 2013, ten
elephants are now crammed into a shockingly small space, forced indoors for
long stretches during the long, cold Midwest winters, steeping in diseases
including tuberculosis and the elephant herpes virus—a known killer of young
elephants. Despite these miserable conditions, and the danger of spreading
infectious diseases to even more elephants, Saint Louis continues its
relentless breeding program. The zoo is now proposing to put massive
resources into development, but nothing will go toward improving the welfare
of these elephants, including four under the age of nine, who have nothing
to look forward to beyond the zoo’s cramped space, disease, and likely
premature death from captivity-induced ailments.

The Saint Louis Zoo appears for the sixth time on IDA’s list.

7. Woodland Park Zoo (Seattle, WA)—The Fox Guarding the Hen House

The Woodland Park Zoo breathed new life into this old
idiom in 2013 by launching a public relations ploy to ward off increasing
criticism over the zoo’s archaic elephant exhibit. The “Elephant Task Force”
was charged with reviewing the elephant program and the welfare of Bamboo,
Chai, and Watoto, but the cards were stacked against the elephants from the
start. The zoo handpicked all 20 participants, which included current and
former zoo board members, and refused to consult with objective experts.
Predictably, the majority of the task force recommended that the elephants
stay at the zoo and continue its failed breeding program. While mulling over
how to move forward, it’s going to be hard for the zoo to ignore recent
survey results, which showed that a whopping 62% of the public, recognizing
the elephants’ needs for space and adequate social groupings, supports the
elephants’ much-deserved retirement to a sanctuary.

The Woodland Park Zoo appears for the seventh time on IDA’s list also for
its decrepit exhibit, housing elephants in a cold climate, relentless
breeding program, and the fact that all three elephants suffer from
captivity-induced ailments.

8. Oregon Zoo (Portland, OR)—No Relief in Sight

The Oregon Zoo spent early 2013 smoothing out a public relations nightmare
after admitting that an elephant born there was contractually owned by a
company that rents animals for entertainment. The zoo has yet to explain why
it misled voters in selling a 2008 bond about plans for an offsite preserve
to provide more space for the zoo’s elephants. The zoo pulled the rug out
from under voters—and the elephants—when it quietly shifted gears to instead
plan a remote center for bringing in additional elephants and ramp up a
second breeding program. Meanwhile, the zoo is spending $53 million—more
than twice the annual budget for the Kenya Wildlife Service, which protects
tens of thousands of elephants—to expand the exhibit from 1 ½ acres to 6 ¼.
This will provide no meaningful relief for the zoo’s eight Asian elephants
who suffer from a range of captivity-related problems, including foot and
joint disease, and tuberculosis.

At a time when wild African elephants are being slaughtered in record
numbers for ivory, Wildlife Safari is putting its own spin on
“conservation.” Wildlife Safari, a drive-through park that holds three
African elephants, has landed on IDA’s list in previous years for using
elephants in car washes. Countless AZA-accredited zoos play the conservation
card to justify housing elephants in captivity, but Wildlife Safari is
upping the ante by resorting to cheap entertainment gimmicks. In 2013,
Safari officials claimed that taking money from well-meaning tourists to see
elephants paint ornaments would “hopefully” help stop poaching. Really? IDA
would like to see the evidence of that. One thing is clear: these types of
activities, sanctioned by the zoo industry, provide zero educational value
and do nothing to engender the respect, much less galvanize the action,
needed to save the species.
Wildlife Safari appears on IDA’s list for the third time.

10. Denver Zoo (Denver, CO)—What a Load of Bull

Billy (Budi)

The Denver Zoo set a dangerous precedent in 2013 by
bringing a young bull from Europe, making Billy (Budi) reportedly the first
imported Asian elephant in more than 30 years. It’s no secret that housing
male elephants is a challenge, but adding to their numbers to bring in “new
blood and genes,” when existing captive elephants desperately need better
conditions, defies reason. In its desperate bid to boost the number of
captive elephants, which does nothing to help conserve the species, the zoo
industry is ignoring what should be the priority—the welfare of individuals.
At just six years old, Billy has already been moved twice, prematurely
separated from his mother at the tender age of four. The Denver Zoo hopes to
eventually house at least eight bulls to use them for breeding and enable
other zoos to do the same. The zoo industry should instead halt breeding
altogether and take better care of the hundreds of elephants already
languishing in substandard zoos.

The Denver Zoo appears on IDA’s list for the first time.

2013 Hall of Shame - The Naibi Zoo, Bowmanville Zoo:

The Niabi Zoo has been inducted into IDA’s “Hall of Shame” for its role
as partner in crime in the most shameful inter-zoo transfer of 2013. The
Bowmanville Zoo grabbed a top spot on IDA’s list last year and has now been
inducted into IDA’s “Hall of Shame” in part for working an elephant right up
until her death.

Niabi Zoo (Coal Valley, Illinois)—The Ultimate Betrayal

The Niabi Zoo squandered the opportunity to do the right
thing for two Asian elephants by retiring them to a sanctuary, but instead
sacrificed Sophie and Babe’s welfare by dumping them in yet another decrepit
zoo with a history of tuberculosis. These two elephants suffered for a
decade in Niabi’s archaic exhibit, locked indoors during the long, cold
winters. Prodded into action when the AZA pulled accreditation after years
of overlooking the zoo’s disgraceful elephant cell, Niabi appeared to
finally consider the needs of these elephants. Yet, the zoo ignored a
consultant’s recommendations that the elephants needed space, enrichment,
and a larger social grouping and snuck Sophie and Babe overnight to the
Little Rock Zoo where the elephants’ existing, chronic health problems will
likely worsen. The Niabi Zoo no longer holds elephants, but its betrayal of
Sophie and Babe earns the zoo a permanent spot in our Hall of Shame.

Bowmanville Zoo (Bowmanville, Canada)—Worked to Death

It’s unusual for a zoo to make it on IDA’s Hall of
Shame after just one appearance on the Ten Worst Zoos list, but the
Bowmanville Zoo has earned this shameful distinction. As if housing a highly
social female elephant all alone wasn’t bad enough, the zoo made money off
Limba for decades by using her in circuses, weddings, and any other gig in
order to make a buck. In late 2013, the zoo rallied its fans to protest
Limba’s exclusion from a holiday parade while knowing that Limba was gravely
ill, likely with cancer. Still, the zoo marched Limba through chilly,
crowded streets and euthanized her two weeks later. Limba is the fifth
elephant to die at Bowmanville in seven years, and the only one to make it
past the age of 40. The good news is that the zoo no longer has elephants,
and IDA will do everything we can to keep it that way.

Fair Use Notice: This document, and others on our web site, may contain copyrighted
material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owners.
We believe that this not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use
of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).
If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use,
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.